DOCSLIB.ORG

Removal-Fill: Channel History & Proposed Changes

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Removal-Fill: Channel History & Proposed Changes Review of Proposed Earthwork Projects in the Port of Coos Bay Presentation by: Michael Graybill Presented to: League of Women Voters 31 January 2019 Two Closely Related Dredging Projects Are Under Consideration in Coos Bay: DREDGING PROJECT #1 The Jordan Cove Energy Project 5.7 million cubic yards (Not including maintenance volume) DREDGING PROJECT #2. The Coos Bay Navigation Channel Expansion project 18 million cubic yards (Not including maintenance volume) Two Closely Related Dredging Projects Are Under Consideration in Coos Bay: DREDGING PROJECT #1 The Jordan Cove Energy Project 5.7 million cubic yards (Not including maintenance volume) 23.7 Million Cubic Yards! DREDGING PROJECT #2. The Coos Bay Navigation Channel Expansion project 18 million cubic yards (Not including maintenance volume) DREDGING PROJECT #1 The Jordan Cove Energy Project 5.7 million cubic yards (Does not include maintenance volume) Land disposal DREDGING PROJECT #2. The Coos Bay Navigation Channel Expansion project 18 million cubic yards (Does not including maintenance volume) Ocean disposal DREDGING PROJECT #1 The Jordan Cove Energy Project 5.7 million cubic yards (Does not include maintenance volume) Land disposal DREDGING PROJECT #2. The Coos Bay Navigation Channel Expansion Project 18 million cubic yards (Does not include maintenance volume) Ocean disposal Project #1 Proposed Earthwork: Jordan Cove Energy Project Project has 3 Elements: 1. Natural Gas Pipeline 229-mile route; mostly over land; crosses 400+ wetlands and water bodies Hardly any dredging but massive excavation work to bury pipe Extensive Horizontal Directional Drilling of pipeline under the Bay 2. LNG Factory on N Spit Factory super chills gas to a liquid (-220 degrees F) No dredging needed to build factory Much filling needed to elevate facility above tsunami zone 3. LNG Ship Terminal 5.7 Million Cubic Yards of dredging and filling Access Channel, Marine Slip, Navigation Reliability Improvement Open trench pipeline installation Gas Pipeline Drilled Under Bay Horizontal Directional Drilling Coos Bay West 5,192’ 7,000 cy Coos Bay East 8,972’ long 12,000 cy Project #1 Proposed Earthwork: Jordan Cove Energy Project Project has 3 Elements: 1. Natural Gas Pipeline 229-mile route; mostly over land; crosses 400+ wetlands and water bodies Hardly any dredging but massive excavation work to bury pipe 2. LNG Factory on N Spit Factory super chills gas to a liquid (-220 degrees F) No dredging needed to build factory Much filling needed to elevate facility above tsunami zone 3. LNG Ship Terminal 5.7 Million Cubic Yards of dredging and filling Access Channel, Marine Slip, Navigation Reliability Improvement Proposed Dredge Spoils placement (5.4 million cubic yards) Jordan Cove Terminal Site Dredge spoil placement areas and fill elevations Jordan Cove terminal area LNG tanker berth Project #1 Proposed Earthwork: Jordan Cove Energy Project Project has 3 Elements: 3. LNG Ship Terminal 5.7 Million Cubic Yards of dredging Access Channel, Marine Slip, Navigation Reliability Improvement Excavate 5,400,0000 Cubic Yards Slip and Berth: 4,000,000 cubic yards Slip & Berth - 49’ Access Channel - 49’ deep Access Channel 1,400,000 cubic yards (Major estuary alteration) Slip and Access Channel 5,400,000 Cubic Yards Fill Autzen stadium 275’ deep Excavation of 1.4 million cubic yards of sediment to make the Access Channel will dramatically alter the shoreline of the Bay Eelgrass bed at access channel site Access Channel Eelgrass bed Dredging area Liquid Natural Gas on Board 40,900,000 gallons 14,600 Propane truck loads LNG carrier Asia Venture 2017 Cargo capacity 154,948 cubic meters 935’ long x 142’ wide x 39’ draft Slip & access channel Navigation Reliability Improvements Jordan Cove Energy Project Navigation Reliability Improvements Total sand volume 78,800 cy Total rock volume 509,800 cy Dredge Area 3 Dredge area 4 25,000 cy sand 25,000 cy sand 200 cy rock Dredge area 2 25,000 cy sand Dredge Area 1 159,000 cy rock 4,300 cy sand 346,000 cy rock Navigation Reliability Improvement Areas 588,600 cubic yards Fill Autzen stadium 30 feet deep Construction Dredging: NRI’s, slip and access channel 5,700,000 cubic yards Fill Autzen stadium 290 feet deep Project Lifetime Dredging: 9,470,000 cubic yards Maintenance Dredging (30 years): Fill Autzen stadium 482 feet deep 3,770,000 cubic yards Fill Autzen stadium 192 feet deep Autzen Stadium Cumulative dredging summary for Project #1 However……. LNG berth is designed for ships with capacity up to 217,000 cubic meters; This is larger than the 148,000 cubic meter limit set by the Coast Guard. To use this capacity it will be necessary to make the navigation channel deeper and wider Wood Chip carrier Princess Haru (2017) 656’long 105’wide The LNG Berth is designed for ships with capacities up to 217,000 cubic meters 217,000 cubic meter ships are 377’ longer and 59’ wider than Coos Bay chip ships LNG Carrier Al Gattara (2007) 216,200 Cubic meters capacity 1033’ long x 164’wide The observation deck of the Empire state building is 1,050 feet Earthwork Project #2 Coos Bay Navigation Channel Expansion Project Largest dredging project in history of Port of Coos Bay Double the size of the channel between the ocean and the rail bridge 18 Million Cubic Yards of dredging ( 3x more than Project #1) Extensive excavation of bedrock at bottom of channel $7.5 million Study costs paid by Jordan Cove Energy Project Potential to Change How Coos Bay Functions Project #2 Coos Bay Navigation Channel Expansion Project Project #2 Coos Bay Navigation Channel Expansion Project High tide level Portion of bay that varies with the tide Low tide level Existing navigation channel -37’deep x 300’ wide Total channel area: 11,100 sq. ft. Portion of Bay below low below tidelow of Bay Portion Portion of bay below below of low bay tide Portion Bottom of Bay High tide level Portion of bay that varies with the tide Low tide level Proposed Channel Expansion Existing navigation channel Total channel area: 11,100 sq. ft. 37’deep Total channel - area: 20,250 sq. ft. deep45’ 300’wide Portion of Bay below low below tidelow of Bay Portion Portion of bay below below of low bay tide Portion 450’ wide Bottom of Bay First Six Miles of Channel Bottom is Bedrock The Proposed Channel Expansion Deepen from -37’ to 45’ and widen from 300’ to 450’ wide Remove 18 million cubic yards Over 1 million cubic yards of bedrock Disposal in Ocean Consultants currently studying “Confined Blasting” to remove bedrock Thank you Very Much! Example of the largest LNG vessel authorized by Coast Guard for Coos Bay Navigation Channel: (148,000 cubic meters) LNG Carrier Energy Navigator 2008 148,000 cubic Meters = 950’ long x 160’ wide 39,097,463 gallons = Cargo Capacity 147,558 cubic meters 59 Olympic swimming pools Project #1 Proposed Earthwork: Jordan Cove Energy Project Project has 3 Elements: 1. Natural Gas Pipeline 229-mile route; mostly over land; crosses 400+ wetlands and water bodies Hardly any dredging but massive excavation work to bury pipe Extensive Horizontal Directional Drilling of pipeline under the Bay 2. LNG Factory on N Spit Factory super chills gas to a liquid (-220 degrees F) No dredging needed to build factory Much filling needed to elevate facility above tsunami zone 3. LNG Ship Terminal Access Channel, Marine Slip, Navigation Reliability Improvement 5.7 Million Cubic Yards of dredging and filling PORT OF COOS BAY REQUEST TO THE US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS: Deepen & Widen the Navigation Channel from Ocean - River Mile 8.2 • Deepen the channel from -37’ to -45’ • Widen the channel from 300’ to 450’. • Expand channel entrance to 1,280’ wide and 57’ deep. • Taper channel entrance to 45’deep and 450’ wide at river mile 1 • Allow dredging 5’ deeper than the maintenance depths Dredging And Disposal Required: • 18 million cubic yards of dredged material (sand and > 1 mcy rock) • New 1,850 acre (2 square mile) Disposal Site offshore from Sunset Bay State Park. • The disposal site is-140’ to -320’deep Project #2 Coos Bay Navigation Channel Expansion Project .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ferry LNG Study Draft Final Report
    Evaluating the Use of Liquefied Natural Gas in Washington State Ferries Draft Final Report Prepared For: Joint Transportation Committee Consultant Team Cedar River Group John Boylston January 2012 Joint Transportation Committee Mary Fleckenstein P.O. Box 40937 Olympia, WA 98504‐0937 (360) 786‐7312 [email protected] Cedar River Group Kathy Scanlan 755 Winslow Way E, Suite 202 Bainbridge Island, WA 98110 (206) 451‐4452 [email protected] The cover photo shows the Norwegian ferry operator Fjord1's newest LNG fueled ferry. Joint Transportation Committee LNG as an Energy Source for Vessel Propulsion EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The 2011 Legislature directed the Joint Transportation Committee to investigate the use of liquefied natural gas (LNG) on existing Washington State Ferry (WSF) vessels as well as the new 144‐car class vessels and report to the Legislature by December 31, 2011 (ESHB 1175 204 (5)); (Chapter 367, 2011 Laws, PV). Liquefied natural gas (LNG) provides an opportunity to significantly reduce WSF fuel costs and can also have a positive environmental effect by eliminating sulfur oxide and particulate matter emissions and reducing carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide emissions from WSF vessels. This report recommends that the Legislature consider transitioning from diesel fuel to liquefied natural gas for WSF vessels, making LNG vessel project funding decisions in the context of an overall LNG strategic operation, business, and vessel deployment and acquisition analysis. The report addresses the following questions: Security. What, if any, impact will the conversion to LNG fueled vessels have on the WSF Alternative Security Plan? Vessel acquisition and deployment plan. What are the implications of LNG for the vessel acquisition and deployment plan? Vessel design and construction.
    [Show full text]
  • Key Technologies of LNG Carrier and Recent MHI Activity- Variation Of
    Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Technical Review Vol. 47 No. 3 (September 2010) 1 Technology Trends and MHI Activities for LNG Carriers - Diverse Shipbuilding and Marine Products in the LNG Supply Chain - SAI HIRAMATSU*1 KAZUYOSHI HIRAOKA*1 YOSHIKAZU FUJINO*1 KENJI TSUMURA*1 With natural gas garnering greater attention as an energy option with low environmental impact, shipbuilding and marine products in the liquefied natural gas (LNG) supply chain have become increasingly diverse. Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd., (MHI) through a variety of activities, has been introducing many products that meet customer needs. Taking a long-term perspective, MHI continues to be active in the development of products that offer dependability, economic efficiency, and low fuel consumption, such as continuous tank-cover LNG carriers with drastic weight reductions and performance improvements, fuel-efficient and environmentally-friendly ultra-steam turbine (UST) and slow-speed diesel with gas injection and re-liquefaction (SSD-GI) propulsion plants, regasification vessels that significantly reduce fuel consumption during the regasification process, and reliable highly economic LNG floating production storage and offloading units. |1. Introduction Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd., (MHI) has built forty-two liquefied natural gas (LNG) carriers since delivery of its first in 1983. While safe, reliable, and economically efficient LNG carrier technologies are being developed through the design and shipbuilding process, the recent rise in LNG demand has generated diverse customer needs for shipbuilding and marine products in the LNG supply chain. This article describes MHI’s activities in the development of highly novel products that take into account diverse supply sources, the need for lower environmental impact, and product development requirements at both upper and lower supply chain streams.
    [Show full text]
  • LNG Fuelled Ships Norwegian Experience
    LNG fuelled ships Norwegian experience Per Magne Einang Research Director MARINTEK www.marintek.com ECSA – EMSA meeting Brussels 24th of November 2009 MARINTEK 1 MARINTEK Independent research and development institute Trondheim Norway MARINTEK 2 Gas engine development since 1984 Wärtsilä Vasa 32 Rolls-Royce B-type Rolls-Royce K-type Dual Fuel gas engines Lean Burn gas engines - Constant speed (generator load) - Variable speed (propeller load) MARINTEK 3 Kystgass Snøhvit - base load LNG plant Visjjygon ”Kystgass” Deep sea LNG Coastal LNG ship Regional LNG depot Local LNG skip Local depot Coastal LNG ship MARINTEK 4 LNG distribution and production capacity MARINTEK 5 Small scale receiving terminals in Norway (2009) Receiving LNG terminals LNG receiving terminals in opp(g)eration (green) and under construction (blue) Total number of 30 terminals Wide span in size 100m3 - 3500m3 LNG Source of LNG Local production (marked P) Karmøy 20000 ton/year Kollsnes1 40000 ton/year Kollsnes2 80000 ton/year Tjelbergodden 10000 ton/year Total 150000 ton/year MARINTEK 6 Small receivinggp terminal at an aluminum plant LNG ship 1000m3 LNG MARINTEK 7 New LNG carrier capacity of 7500m3 (Opera te d b y A nt ony V ed er) MARINTEK 8 Lyse gas LNG i Risavika Stavanger Cappyacity 300 000 tons/y ear Starting gq 4. quarter 2010 Possible second train 300 000 tons/year MARINTEK 9 Nordic LNG (Lyse Gas and Skaugen) Logistic solutions with ships Six multi gas (LNG, Ethylene, LPG) carriers of 10 000 cbm and two of 12 000 cbm MARINTEK 10 Large LNG terminals in Europe MARINTEK 11 LNG chain – energy consumption MARINTEK 12 Well – to – wheel analyses, road transport WllWell – to – TkTank (ti)(energy consumption processes) 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Shipping LNG from a Remote Arctic Plant
    Shipping LNG from a Remote Arctic Plant Frederic Hannon LNG Shipping Project Manager TOTAL – Gas, Renewables & Power Division YAMAL LNG, a Pilot Project in the Arctic – Some Key Features Shareholders 9.9% 20.0% 50.1% Source: Public information 20.0% ● LNG Plant located in Sabetta, North-East Wells 208 directional and horizontal of the Yamal Peninsula, Russia Capacity 3 x 5.5 MMtpa + 1 x 0,94 MMtpa LNG, 1.2 MMtpa Condensates ● Arctic conditions (Temperatures -52°C / 3 months of polar night) Capex 27 G$ (Yamal LNG) ● Ice free port: 5 months Trains 1,2,3 started ( nameplate 16,5 Mmtpa) T4 pilot under Construction Status ● South Tambey Gas-Condensate Field: construction exploration and development license until 15 ARC7 LNG Carriers, 11 Conventional LNGCs , 2 ARC7 2045 Shipping Condensate tankers Trans-shipment capacity in Zeebrugge and Ship-to-Ship Transfers ● Reservoirs: 1000- 3500 m deep LNG Deliveries Asia, Europe ● Proved & Probable Reserves : 926 billion cubic meters of natural gas An Integrated Project : • Presidential decree on October 10th, 2010 • Final Investment Decision on December 13th, 2013 with Pioneering Solutions in field of logistics and transportation schemes : The Shipping Scheme for the Export of LNG Westbound : annual ice Eastbound : pluri-annual ice Average ice extension : 830 Nmiles / 2,900 Average ice extension 2,100 Nm / 4,900 Nm – 7/9 days Nm – 14/16 days Year Round Northern Sea Route Route Sabetta 16,5 mtpa LNG / Trans-shipment # 220 cargoes Terminal /year Summer Route TRANSHIPMENT : SHIP – STORAGE - SHIP Winter
    [Show full text]
  • Lng Bunkering Technical and Operational Advisory
    LNG BUNKERING TECHNICAL AND OPERATIONAL ADVISORY ABS | LNG BUNKERING TECHNICAL AND OPERATIONAL ADVISORY | 01 © VladSV/Shutterstock OUR MISSION The mission of ABS is to serve the public interest as well as the needs of our members and clients by promoting the security of life and property and preserving the natural environment. HEALTH, SAFETY, QUALITY & ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY We will respond to the needs of our members and clients and the public by delivering quality service in support of our Mission that provides for the safety of life and property and the preservation of the marine environment. We are committed to continually improving the effectiveness of our HSQE performance and management system with the goal of preventing injury, ill health and pollution. We will comply with all applicable legal requirements as well as any additional requirements ABS subscribes to which relate to HSQE aspects, objectives and targets. Disclaimer: While ABS uses reasonable efforts to accurately describe and update the information in this Advisory, ABS makes no warranties or representations as to its accuracy, currency or completeness. ABS assumes no liability or responsibility for any errors or omissions in the content of this Advisory. To the extent permitted by applicable law, everything in this Advisory is provided “as is” without warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied, including, but not limited to, the implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, or noninfringement. In no event will ABS be liable for any damages whatsoever, including special, indirect, consequential or incidental damages or damages for loss of profits, revenue or use, whether brought in contract or tort, arising out of or connected with this Advisory or the use or reliance upon any of the content or any information contained herein.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. LNG Export Projects Update
    LNG ALLIES > DEVELOPMENTS IN Q4 2018 U.S. LNG Export Projects Update LEAD: CORPUS CHRISTI SHIPS INITIAL LNG CARGO On Dec. 11, 2018, the first commissioning cargo of liq- uefied natural gas (LNG) was loaded and departed from Cheniere Energy’s Corpus Christi liquefaction facility in Texas, marking the first export of LNG from the state and from a greenfield liquefaction facility in the lower 48 states. The cargo was loaded on the LNG carrierMaria Energy, chartered by Cheniere Marketing. The Corpus Christi liquefaction facility consists of three large-scale LNG trains and supporting infrastructure, with an additional seven smaller trains proposed. The facility’s first train produced first LNG in Nov. 2018 and is expected to reach substantial completion in Q1 2019. Train 2 is ex- and Regasification Units (FSRU), Floating Liquefaction pected to reach substantial completion in the H2 2019, and (FLNG), and small scale LNG. Wouter Pastoor, also from Train 3 in H2 2021. Golar, is Delfin’s new Chief Operating Officer. Poston takes over from Delfin founder Fred Jones. PROJECTS UNDER CONSTRUCTION ■ Magnolia LNG (Louisiana) ■ Cameron LNG (Louisiana) Liquefied Natural Gas Ltd. has extended through June 30, On Nov. 2, Cameron LNG requested authorization from 2019, its current binding engineering, procurement, and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to construction contract with KSJV (a KBR/SKE&C joint begin commissioning activities for the first train of the venture led by KBR) for the Magnolia LNG project. 14 mtpa project now under construction in Hackberry, Louisiana. Sempra continues to state that all of the first ■ Sabine Pass Train Six (Louisiana) three trains at Cameron should be in service in 2019.
    [Show full text]
  • GIIGNL Annual Report Profile
    The LNG industry GIIGNL Annual Report Profile Acknowledgements Profile We wish to thank all member companies for their contribution to the report and the GIIGNL is a non-profit organisation whose objective following international experts for their is to promote the development of activities related to comments and suggestions: LNG: purchasing, importing, processing, transportation, • Cybele Henriquez – Cheniere Energy handling, regasification and its various uses. • Najla Jamoussi – Cheniere Energy • Callum Bennett – Clarksons The Group constitutes a forum for exchange of • Laurent Hamou – Elengy information and experience among its 88 members in • Jacques Rottenberg – Elengy order to enhance the safety, reliability, efficiency and • María Ángeles de Vicente – Enagás sustainability of LNG import activities and in particular • Paul-Emmanuel Decroës – Engie the operation of LNG import terminals. • Oliver Simpson – Excelerate Energy • Andy Flower – Flower LNG • Magnus Koren – Höegh LNG • Mariana Ortiz – Naturgy Energy Group • Birthe van Vliet – Shell • Mika Iseki – Tokyo Gas • Yohei Hukins – Tokyo Gas • Donna DeWick – Total • Emmanuelle Viton – Total • Xinyi Zhang – Total © GIIGNL - International Group of Liquefied Natural Gas Importers All data and maps provided in this publication are for information purposes and shall be treated as indicative only. Under no circumstances shall they be regarded as data or maps intended for commercial use. Reproduction of the contents of this publication in any manner whatsoever is prohibited without prior
    [Show full text]
  • Capacity Analysis for Approach Channels Shared by LNG Carriers
    Journal of Marine Science and Engineering Article Capacity Analysis for Approach Channels Shared by LNG Carriers Xiang Gao 1,2, Linying Chen 1,2,*, Pengfei Chen 1,2, Yu Luo 1 and Junmin Mou 1,2 1 School of Navigation, Wuhan University of Technology, Wuhan 430063, China; [email protected] (X.G.); [email protected] (P.C.); [email protected] (Y.L.); [email protected] (J.M.) 2 Hubei Key Laboratory of Inland Shipping Technology, Wuhan University of Technology, Wuhan 430063, China * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 28 July 2020; Accepted: 7 September 2020; Published: 9 September 2020 Abstract: The transport of liquefied natural gas (LNG) has significant impact on traffic capacity of waterways, especially the approach channels shared by LNG carriers and other types of ships (general cargo ships, container ships, etc.). Few studies take the behavioral characteristics of LNG carriers and their impacts into consideration. In this paper, we propose a framework for capacity analysis of shared approach channels based on the spatial–temporal consumption method. It consists of three modules: (1) the tide module predicts the tidal height and tidal time for identifying the time windows for LNG carriers; (2) the spatial–temporal consumption module is introduced to calculate the capacity of approach channels; (3) the LNG carrier navigation module is for analyzing the characteristics of LNG carriers and the impact on the capacity of approach channels. A spatial–temporal indexed chart is designed to visualize the utilization of the spatial–temporal resources. A case study on the approach channel of Yueqing Bay near the east coast of China is conducted to verify the effectiveness of the framework.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessment of Innovative Small Scale Lng Carrier Concepts
    ASSESSMENT OF INNOVATIVE SMALL SCALE LNG CARRIER CONCEPTS Carlos Guerrero, Global Market Leader, Tankers and Gas Carriers Bureau Veritas Marine & Offshore Carlos Guerrero, Bureau Veritas Marine & Offshore INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND Sophisticated liquefied natural gas (LNG) carriers for break bulk distribution commonly known as small scale LNG carriers have been developed for many years already. The first modern designs are in service for more than one decade. Although this market segment represent less than one per cent of the total shipping capacity, it is still a high value fleet taking into account the unitary cost of small scale carriers. The concept of small scale LNG carrier has further developed in the past few years due to new developments linked to the distribution of LNG as a marine bunker fuel. LNG as a marine fuel is step by step taking a relevant position as one of the most interesting solution to comply with stringent environmental regulations for shipping. The global cap of 0,5% of sulphur content in marine fuels established by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) will possibly drive shipowners to consider clean fuels instead of exhaust gas abatement systems in the horizon of 2020. As a consequence additional LNG bunker supply capacity is required to satisfy the demand and it is expected that new small scale carriers dedicated to deliver this bunker fuel will be deployed in the most important bunkering hubs all over the world. In fact several small scale LNG ships below 10,000 cubic meters have recently entered into service with LNG bunkering ability. These ships are more innovative than standard small LNG carriers and have been designed and built to perform break bulk LNG distribution but mainly distribution of LNG as a bunker fuel.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Safety Consequences of a Terrorist Attack on a Tanker Carrying Liquefied Natural Gas Need Clarification
    United States Government Accountability Office Report to Congressional Requesters GAO February 2007 MARITIME SECURITY Public Safety Consequences of a Terrorist Attack on a Tanker Carrying Liquefied Natural Gas Need Clarification GAO-07-316 February 2007 MARITIME SECURITY Accountability Integrity Reliability Highlights Public Safety Consequences of a Highlights of GAO-07-316, a report to Terrorist Attack on a Tanker Carrying congressional requesters Liquefied Natural Gas Need Clarification Why GAO Did This Study What GAO Found The United States imports natural The six unclassified completed studies GAO reviewed examined the effect of gas by pipeline from Canada and by a fire resulting from an LNG spill but produced varying results; some studies tanker as liquefied natural gas also examined other potential hazards of a large LNG spill. The studies’ (LNG) from overseas. LNG—a conclusions about the distance at which 30 seconds of exposure to the heat supercooled form of natural gas— (heat hazard) could burn people ranged from less than 1/3 of a mile to about currently accounts for about 3 percent of total U.S. natural gas 1-1/4 miles. Sandia National Laboratories (Sandia) conducted one of the supply, with an expected increase studies and concluded, based on its analysis of multiple attack scenarios, to about 17 percent by 2030, that a good estimate of the heat hazard distance would be about 1 mile. according to the Department of Federal agencies use this conclusion to assess proposals for new LNG Energy (DOE). With this projected import terminals. The variations among the studies occurred because increase, many more LNG import researchers had to make modeling assumptions since there are no data for terminals have been proposed.
    [Show full text]
  • Enabling the NGL Oceangoing Pipeline
    Navigator Holdings Ltd 2018 Annual Report Enabling the NGL oceangoing pipeline “Navigator Aurora loading a maiden cargo of ethane at Marcus Hook, Pennsylvania” Our world-class fleet Ethylene capable fleet Aurora Eclipse Nova Prominence (37.3k cbm) (37.3k cbm) (37.3k cbm) (37.3k cbm) Neptune Pluto Saturn Venus Orion (22.1k cbm) (22.1k cbm) (22.1k cbm) (22.1k cbm) (22.1k cbm) Atlas Europa Oberon Triton Umbrio (21k cbm) (21k cbm) (21k cbm) (21k cbm) (21k cbm) Semi refrigerated fleet Magellan Pegasus Phoenix Aries Capricorn Gemini (20.9k cbm) (22k cbm) (22k cbm) (20.5k cbm) (20.5k cbm) (20.5k cbm) Scorpio Taurus Virgo Leo Libra Centauri (20.5k cbm) (20.5k cbm) (20.5k cbm) (20.5k cbm) (20.5k cbm) (22k cbm) Ceres Ceto Copernico Luga Yauza (22k cbm) (22k cbm) (22k cbm) (22k cbm) (22k cbm) Fully refrigerated fleet Jorf (38k cbm) Glory Grace Gusto Genesis Galaxy Global (22.5k cbm) (22.5k cbm) (22.5k cbm) (22.5k cbm) (22.5k cbm) (22.5k cbm) Vessels in the fleet technically managed in-house by Navigator Gas Shipmanagement Limited. UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549 FORM 20-F ‘ REGISTRATION STATEMENT PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(b) or (g) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 OR È ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2018 OR ‘ TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the transition period from to OR ‘ SHELL COMPANY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 Date of event requiring this shell company report Commission file number: 001-36202 NAVIGATOR HOLDINGS LTD.
    [Show full text]
  • Utilizing the Liquid Natural Gas in Small Scale Application in Power Generation, Ndustrialization and As Alternative Vehicle
    UNCTAD 17th Africa OILGASMINE, Khartoum, 23-26 November 2015 Extractive Industries and Sustainable Job Creation Utilizing the liquid natural gas in small scale application in power generation, industrialization and as alternative Vehicle fuel By Abdalla Altayeb Abdalla Managing Director 3ACryogenic FZE, United Arab Emirates The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of UNCTAD. UNCTAD 17th OILGASMINE in Khartoum, Sudan, 23 - 26 November 2015 Utilizing the liquid natural gas in small scale application in power generation, industrialization and as alternative Vehicle fuel. Abdalla Altayeb Abdalla Africa’s portion of the world’s natural gas • Africa is emerging as a major supplier of natural gas as new gas discoveries emerge to reshape the world’s energy landscape. • The region is rapidly establishing itself as a world- class natural gas producer led by Algeria, Nigeria, Angola, Egypt, and Equatorial Guinea. • Recently two new countries have joined them as key players : Mozambique and Tanzania. The newly discovered gas fields of these two countries have put them on par with the reserves of the largest gas suppliers in the world today. Africa’s portion of the world’s natural gas • According to the 2012 BP Statistical Energy Survey, in the year 2011 Africa had proved natural gas reserves is about 6.97% of the world’s known supply and is equivalent to 71.7 years of current production. • In 2012, other resources reported, Africa’s technically recoverable natural gas reserves as substantially higher than that, an amount constituting almost 10 percent of the world’s total. • With the new "Super giant“ discovery of gas off the Egyptian coast in the Mediterranean field “30 trillion cubic feet of gas”, will change African natural gas reserves as substantially higher than the stated 10%.
    [Show full text]